Review Article
Survey and Diagnostic Challenges after Transmission-Stop: Confirming Elimination of Schistosomiasis haematobium in Morocco
Table 1
Considered diagnostic tests for Schistosomiasis haematobium in the Moroccan survey.
| Diagnostic | Test | Field | Cost/test (USD) | Evaluation | Sensitivity/specificity | Note | Ref |
| Clinical test | Hem test1 | + | 0, 3 | Iraq, Ghana, Sudan, Tanzania, Nigeria, Sub Saharan Africa | 79%/98% | Morbidity test | [26] |
| Antibodies detection | HAMA EITB2 | _ | >5 | Morocco USA | 95%/100% | High cost and not field-friendly | [12, 23] | EITB/WB 23kDa3 | _ | 8, 8 | Egypt and Morocco | 50/91% | High cost and not field-friendly | [23, 24] | ELISA-SEA4 (soluble eggs antigen) | + | 8, 8 | Ghana | 98.5%/83%/93% | High cost | [23, 25] | | | | | | Need laboratory | | HAI5(whole adult worm antigen) | + | 2.5 | Germany, Chile and Netherlands | 92%/94.7% | Acceptable | [25ā26] | DDIA6 | + | 1 | China | -- | Need evaluation in haematobium low endemic areas | [28] | RDT SmCTF7 | + | <3 | Ivory Coast | 66.7%/34.4% | Not acceptable | [29] |
| Antigen detection | Filtration | _ | <3 | Africa, Iran, Iraq | | Need laboratory | [30] | RDT filtration | + | <3 | USA, Kenya | 79%/95% | Field friendly and cost effectiveness, but not hygienic in large number of samples | [31] | POC CCA8 | + | 3 | Cameroun, Ivory Coast Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda | 36%/78% | Not sensitive in haematobium low endemic areas | [32, 33] | | | | Zanzibar | 99% | | [30] | PCR9 | _ | 8 | Brazil | 100% | High cost | [20, 33] |
|
|
1. Urine hemedipstick, 2. Heamatobium microsomal antigen enzyme Immunotransfert Blot, 3. 23 kDa Western blot, 4. Soluble eggs antigen enzyme linkedimmunosorbent assay, 5. Hemmaglutination indirect, 6. Dipstick dye immunoassay, 7. Schistosoma mansoni cercarial transformation fluid, 8. Point of care/circulating cathodic Antigen, 9. Polymerase chain reaction.
|